Question

State the multievel predicition process in detail.

Answer 1

This study used daily diary data to model trait and state Positive Affect (PA) and Negative Affect (NA) using the Positive and Negative Affect Schedule (PANAS; Watson, Clark, & Tellegen, 1988). Data were collected from 364 college students over five days. Intraclass correlation coefficients suggested approximately equal amounts of variability at the trait and state levels. Multilevel factor analysis revealed that the model specifying two correlated factors (PA, NA) and correlated uniqueness terms among redundant items provided the best fit. Trait and state PA and NA were generally associated with stress, anxiety, depression, and three types of self-esteem (performance, academic, social). The coefficients describing these relationships differed somewhat, suggesting that trait and state measurement may have different predictive utility.


Affect, or emotional response, is a key indicator of psychological functioning. Two valenced dimensions, termed Positive Affect (PA) and Negative Affect (NA), have been described as the general factors of emotional experience (Watson, Clark, & Tellegen, 1988). Individuals with high PA are characterized by “high energy, full concentration, and pleasurable engagement,” whereas those with low PA are characterized by “sadness and lethargy” (Watson et al., 1988). Individuals with low NA are characterized as “being in a state of calmness and serenity”, whereas those with high NA are characterized by “subjective distress and unpleasurable engagement” which includes apprehension, anger, irritation, shame, fear, sadness, guilt, and a negative view of the self (Watson et al., 1988).

Researchers generally agree that conceptually similar affective states (e.g., fear, anxiety) represent the same dimension (e.g., NA); although, there is disagreement regarding how these dimensions are organized. Proponents of the bipolar approach contend that the constructs of PA and NA are polar sides of a single dimension which are either activated or inhibited at a given moment (Barrett & Russell, 1998; Carroll, Yik, Russell, & Barrett, 1999; Green, Goldman, & Salovey, 1993; Russell & Carroll, 1999; van Schuur & Kiers, 1994). This suggests that emotion occurs on a continuum from unpleasant to pleasant, and that the experience of one denotes the absence of the other. Bipolar theorists suggest that the (co)activation of affect enables the simultaneous experience of seemingly opposite emotions, as if they were independent constructs (Barrett & Russell, 1998; Larsen, McGraw, & Cacioppo, 2001), whereas others suggest that there are two affective dimensions. There is a wide body of research supporting this dual (PA, NA) structure of affect, however the extent of the association between the affective factors is disputed. The factors have been described as “largely independent” because PA and NA can be experienced simultaneously, but the negative intercorrelation is too to weak suggest nonindependence (Tellegen, Watson, & Clark, 1999; Watson & Clark, 1997; Watson et al., 1988). Many studies employ the two factor approach because the two-factor structure has been well-supported, although the “largely independent structure” has been difficult to reproduce. Thus, some